Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Is longer considered better for poweder skis?
Posts: 147
-
Karma: 115
I'm looking to pick up a pair of the Liberty Helix's as my powder ski for the season. Being only about 155lbs and 5'10 I'm kinda torn between the 176 and the 187 length. Normally I ski karma's in 177 so part of me is leaning towards the shorter length, but then again since I'll be using it for powder the other part of me thinks I should go longer. What do yall recomend?
Posts: 10729
-
Karma: 256
longer = more surface area = more float.
I think that if they are going to be just your pow and big mountain skis, go longer.
if you're gonna want to play around with them, MAYBE go with the short length, of find a different comparable ski with a mid length. But go with the 187s
Posts: 1998
-
Karma: 114
i personally would go shorter because 177 or whatever it was is already floaty enough and you can still play around on them
Posts: 147
-
Karma: 115
I feel like it's one of those situations that could go either way. There is some chance I might head up to vermont for some tree skiing at Jay peak/Store, and there I feel like the shorter length could be beneficial. At the same time I realize most of the powder I'm going to be skiing will be out west on bigger/open areas. Being as I already have the karmas to play around on I'm leaning towards the longer length. The consensus when I talk to people seems to be that if you're interested in tree skiing or more playful skiing go short, but if you want a big mountain type ski, go long.
Posts: 1998
-
Karma: 114
i also live on the west coast and i ski squaw valley, but i still say shorter because you can do everything with them and not just powder skis, so if your up there doing powder five runs but then you want to do a little bit of jibbing you can do it with the shorter skis and not the longer skis, but thats just one opinion, because i ski northstar on powder days because of the stash which is like a powder terrain park.
Posts: 11256
-
Karma: 424
At your size the 187 shouldn't be a problem at all, they'll give you more float and a lot more stability than the shorter length. However, if you like shorter skis and want to jib more on them then the shorter length would probably be more suitable.
So to answer your question: longer is better for powder skis, but length is also dependent on application. It sounds to me like they won't just be powder skis, so that leaves the decision open to what you want to ride.
Posts: 823
-
Karma: 126
if you are looking for a shorter powder ski check out icelantic skis. they are really short really wide skis, take a look at the nomad in the 168 length specs are tip140, waist105, tail130. small enough for tree skiing and wide enough for deep powder
Posts: 6592
-
Karma: 14
shorter: you're lighter, quicker turns, better for trees
longer: you're not a midget, so they'd be fine, more trees, more speed
its hard cause its such a big diff. maybe you should just try a pair of skis that long first, then make the decision. also, how good of a skier are you? if you're okay, but not charging a lot then id say go shorter cause ur used to it, and itd be a lot easier in the trees
All times are Eastern (-5)
